Re: Platform independent graphical display for Emacs

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Óscar Fuentes <ofv@wanadoo.es>
> Date: Sat, 25 Dec 2021 13:20:09 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > So you'd suggest to the OP to develop the software in the hope that
> > all of the above will happen?  And if it doesn't, just agree for the
> > results to be abandoned?  The OP would have to agree to that.
> 
> Why oh why you don't just say "go ahead and we will look at your work
> when you have something to show" ?

I did -- but that was before I understood what was being proposed.
The OP wanted assurance that the code will be accepted once done, and
I cannot in good faith give him that, given what's being actually
proposed.  Doing so would be betraying the OP's trust, especially if
eventually we don't like the results.

> > And I fail to see how that solves the long-term maintenance problem,
> > once we do accept the code.  This happened in the past, more than
> > once.
> 
> Yes, because having a single, modern, sane, popular cross-platform
> graphics library (let's say Skia, for instance) would make things much
> worse than the current status-quo, with N entangled backends requiring
> the participation of multiple experts every time a new feature is
> implemented :-/

That's not what on the table, AFAIU.

> To insist: the proposed system would have three characteristics:
> 
> 1. Cross-platform (as the proposal's subject says)
> 
> 2. Simplicity, compared to what we have now.
> 
> 3. New graphical capabilities that will make possible new high-level
>    features.
> 
> I don't know why you keep ignoring point 3, which is the most important,
> and reduce the proposal to "oh, someone wants to add one more graphical
> backend."

I'm not ignoring anything.  You, OTOH, ignore both what is being
proposed and the rest of the discussion.  In effect, you are talking
about an entirely different proposal, one about which I said it
_would_ make sense.